But if IE9 removed functionality, why would it affect those of us on firefox?

Well, I only know enough to have bad ideas.

Oh. Here I thought you might be on to something

Although if the functionality has been deprecated, then it would dissappear eventually from all browsers, not just IE9. Older browsers were forgiving of html errors, but with the recent proliferation of browsers and devices they have become much more strict. I just tried in Firefox 10 and get the same problems.

Google IE9 anchor tag and you'll find many posts about this same problem.

Logged

Delmarva United Homebrewers - President by inverse coup - former president ousted himself.AHA Member since 2006BJCP Certified: B0958

It can't go to message 137880 because it is not on the page, so it reverts to the top post.

Based on my recollection of the thread, the last post I read was 137879 - could it be as simple as it marking the "new post" in the url as the last post read +1? This isn't correct, but if there was some logic that said "if msg# does not exist, go to the first message after msg#" then it would take you to the first new post. And if it was expecting this logic but it got broken somehow, that would explain what we are seeing.

I could be completely wrong about how this works on the back end of course, I'm just making guesses. But the url it is trying to link to doesn't exist.

Hi Everyone,Thanks for your investigation into this matter. We've done some digging as well and read your notes. We feel the code in the forum for the page down link is good and as you all have discovered, seem to be a browser issue.

We think the fix should really happen on the browser end. Any fix, if we could discover the correct place(s) that the code would need to be modified, might cause the same issue in other browsers or for Firefox and others to not work when SMF pushes out an update. We could be chasing our tail after every SMF update. Since this issue is resolvable by viewing in another browser, and an error hasn't been uncovered, I think we should wait and see if the next version of Firefox for Ubunto and others clears it up.Cindy

Thanks for looking into this, but wasn't it your change that made the difference? Firefox and Safari used to work for me and now, since the newer version of the forum is up and running, they don't, right? I was hoping that you'd find the difference from the old to the new version in this respect.

In the mean time if others have been able to use them normally and it's my settings that need to be adjusted, maybe one of those people could help me and others reset our browsers.

Logged

Jeff Gladish, Tampa (989.3, 175.1 Apparent Rennarian)Homebrewing since 1990AHA member since 1991, now a lifetime member BJCP judge since 1995

Hi Everyone,Thanks for your investigation into this matter. We've done some digging as well and read your notes. We feel the code in the forum for the page down link is good and as you all have discovered, seem to be a browser issue.

We think the fix should really happen on the browser end. Any fix, if we could discover the correct place(s) that the code would need to be modified, might cause the same issue in other browsers or for Firefox and others to not work when SMF pushes out an update. We could be chasing our tail after every SMF update. Since this issue is resolvable by viewing in another browser, and an error hasn't been uncovered, I think we should wait and see if the next version of Firefox for Ubunto and others clears it up.Cindy